Skip to main content

tv   Happening Now  FOX News  June 26, 2013 8:00am-10:01am PDT

8:00 am
continues. "happening now" with jon scott and jenna lee. see you again tomorrow. johnston a fox news alert on two historic decisions regarding gay marriage in this country. good morning to you i'm jon scott. jenna: i'm jenna lee. the supreme court handing down rules on two big cases. the federal government's defense of marriage act or doma and proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage. in 5-4 decision the court struck down a key provision of doma saying it's a violation of the fifth amendment. the decision means federal benefits can no longer be denied to same-sex couples who marry in states that allow gay marriage. on prop 8 the justices ruled 5-4 that opponents of same-sex marriage in california do not have the ground to sue which clears the way for gay marriage in that state essentially. today's ruling let's stand an earlier decision by california's highest court that prop 8 is
8:01 am
unconstitutional. we quickly want to give you a little background on both prop 8 and doma because these are words and terms you've heard for several years now. president clinton signed doma into law in 1996. it defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman for the sake of more than 1100 federal laws including estate taxes, social security, survivor benefits and healthcare benefits for federal employees. of it said no state is required to recognize 4 and out of state same-sex marriage, although that part of the law was not before the court, so that stays. california voters enacted proposition 8 in 2008, an amendment to the state constitution that became known as the california marriage protection act. it said only marriage between a man and a woman is valid in the state. so a lot to take in here. a big decision with some -- some wide-ranging effects. tim o'brien has covered the u.s. supreme court for a few decades
8:02 am
now and is author of the new book "murder at the supreme court lethal crimes and landmark cases" this is a landmark decision. walk us through this? >> they are landmark decisions especially the doma case that tells you pretty much where the court is going. the prop 8 case was decided on procedural grounds. this is a big day for gay rights. in california it may appear that gay marriage may now continue although that is not final yet either. i would expect that proponents of gay marriage will now say that the district court decision, which is the law of the land in california invalidating prop 8 only applies to the individual plaintiffs who brought that case, the two gay couples. jenna: it wouldn't mean other couples that are married and have not brought a similar case. >> right, what you're hearing is how it applies to the entire case. i agree with that. i expect you'll find some argument mailed in the district court that the decision only
8:03 am
applies to the actual couples who brought the case and has no other impact beyond the two couple. that is a case that i expect will be brought. i think it's a losing argument but the point is it's not over yet. the defense of marriage act is also, that was a very important decision. the court was ambiguous as to what standard you apply to discrimination based on sexual orientation. the court -- the federal appeals court in massachusetts said any such statute must only be rational, must have some rational basis. decision that the supreme court waurs reviewing in th was reviewing in the doma case is this kind of discrimination is so hostile and so hard to remedy that such discrimination may only be justified by compelling governmental issue. the supreme court did not say what standard to apply. you know it's skeptical of this kind of discrimination. jenna: we'll be having a few segments on this later on, a as to what the cases say about the
8:04 am
relationship about the federal government, the state government and the individual. when you take a look at these cases and maybe some of the other cases we've heard from the court the louisianas few weeks what do you think the supreme court is saying about that relationship. >> if you talk about -- it goes in different directions. you have a states rights case with the voting rights, and affirmative action, the court sort of punted on that. i think the court is viewing each case differently and i see no consist thapb con consistent thread through all of them. i think however that the big decision of the term is this defense of marriage act case, not just because of the impact on marriage, but because it tells you where the court is going. and i would venture to say that in it comes back to the court amendments like the one you have in california, that these amendments are going to be thrown out. jenna: go further into that about what is next. what do you see, this is the last ruling we are going to get of this session if you will from the supreme court, what is
8:05 am
next? you see where the court is going on this maybe throwing out other cases, but in general how do you see what this says about our justices who are really the top judges of the land? >> well, you know that this is going to come back, and you kind of wonder how it would come back. you might almost make the rather bizarre case that proponents of same-sex marriage might do better to go to texas and utah and try to get them to pass an amendment against it then they could appeal it because you know texas and utah would defend such an amendment in the supreme court and would have standing to bring that case up. this has been a longtime coming. we think of this now as the vanguard of the cutting edge of the civil rights movement but these cases have been perk lating in the courts for over 20 years. only now is the court really getting to look at them seriously. you have a couple of other important decisions, both written by justice anthony kennedy who wrote the doma decision today, saying state
8:06 am
laws against homosexual activity are unconstitutional. throwing outa constitutional amendment in colorado that set gays and lesbians aside for no special protection. you can't have affirmative action from them. the opinion by justice kennedy found that was going too far. you have a majority on the court to uphold gay rights, the question is what is the next case? it's out there, it's not alternate the court's doorstep today but it's on its way. jenna: really good context for us today as always, tim, we always appreciate your thoughts. thank you. >> thank you. jon: on update on the man wanted for leaking our government's secret surveillance programs. ecuador's foreign minister saying his government could take months to decide whether to grant asylum to edward snowden. the former nsa contractor is charged with violating american espionage laws. he left hong kong over the weekend, flew to russia, he booked a seat on a havana-bound
8:07 am
flight, never got on. president vladimir putin confirmed he's in a moscow airport, rejecting u.s. pleas to hand him over. >> any accusation directed towards russia is shear nonsense. he is a transit passenger and as such still remains in the transit lounge. as far as any sort of extradition is concerned to wherever it may be, we are only able to hand over citizens of foreign states with those countries with whom we have a core responding international agreement on handing over criminals. we have no such agreement with the united states. jon: moo tin says he's still in the transit zone of the airport, that means he has not passed through russian immigration and technically that means he's not in russia. coming up at the bottom of the hour we will talk about the controversy with ambassador john bolton, former u.s. ambassador to the u.n. and a fox news contributor. a hearing underway right now on
8:08 am
capitol hill looking at waste, fraud and abuse at the i.r.s. as a brand-new scandal heaps more shame on that agency.reasury inl finding i.r.s. employees used government credit cards to buy some dubious items on the taxpayers' dimes, things like diet pills, wine, romance novels, and online pornography. of all the scandals the doing the obama administration, the i.r.s. tops the list. doug mcelway is investigating. >> reporter: within the last 24 hours or so the i.r.s. has again been ep embarrassed by new revelations. they found that government-issued credit cards were abused. at team building exerciserress and management meetings the i.r.s. spent $4,000 nor a popcorn machine rental and prizes including plush animals,
8:09 am
sunglasses, k. the i.r.s. failed to cancel 378 credit cards in cases where the employees had left the i.r.s. the new acting chief said, wasteful spending cannot be tolerated and any employees found to be abusing the system will be held accountable. we are following up on several inappropriate incidents mentioned in the report rey ranging from internal actions to criminal charges. now today a new scandal, the house oversight committee looking alternate the awarding of a $500 million it contract to strong castle signet computers whose owner had a close personal relationship with a i.r.s. deputy director. the contract award degot preferential treatment by claiming to be a disabled vet operating in a hub zone. his alleged disability a military prep school football injury did not keep him from
8:10 am
playing college football. it took him 27 years before he claimed a disability. >> the intention of without a doubt that disabled military veterans receive preference flies in the face of a small injury in 1984 while attending the military academy prep school, one so minor that it had no effect on college football participation for years to follow. >> adding insult to injury they say when the i.r.s. ig learned of this scandal it was basically inattentive. >> the action by the inspector general when he was notified of these allegations, almost a year ago, was a lack of urgency, that the american taxpayers deserve. >> the i.r.s. deputy director who helped award that contract mr. gregory rose man claimed his fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination this morning and was dismissed from the hearing which continues as we speak, jon. jon: you can't make this stuff
8:11 am
up can you. >> you really can't. jon: thank you. jenna: a comprehensive immigration bill is headed for a final senate vote by the end of this week when where it is expected to pass. in the house is a far different story. why some republicans there are saying not so fast on this bill. also new controversy on the keystone pipeline, we haven't talked about that for a while as we learn that a company formally belonging to a top donor of president obama stands to gain millions if the project is not approved. plus, what happened after one stunned homeowner found a snake and a squirrel facing off in her own backyard. a lot of topics to cover today, wide range, jon, snake, squirrels, immigration, et cetera, et cetera. we'll be right back with more.
8:12 am
8:13 am
8:14 am
jon: hot video coming into fox
8:15 am
today. this one you can take in more ways than one. a bold smash and grab caught on tape. surveillance video at a jewelry store in atlanta shows five men stealing nearly a million bucks of rolex watches and jewelry in just seconds. police are still looking for the suspects. scientists in japan unveil a pair of robots destined for space missions. robot astronaut would communicate with its land based counterpart. japan wants to be the first to send a communications robot astronaut into space. and a squirrel and a snake, they get facing off in a bizarre backyard beat down that lasted at least 30 minutes. the homeowner in arizona called authorities. firefighters who arrived at the scene had to step in and break up this battle. both animals were released back into the desert. we presume both of them are unarmed. >> after clearing a major murder he will this week a
8:16 am
comprehensive bill is headed for a senate vote by the end of the week. the bail is expected to face tough opposition when it reaches the house. here is what harry reid had to say about that. >> the speaker said within a period of a little over 24 hours we are going to pass immigration, we are going to have democrat particular votes to do it. as soon as his crazies heard that i guess they talked to him and the next day he came back and said i will only pass it if i have a majority of the majority. jenna: our chief political correspondent carl cameron is live in our d.c. bureau with more on all of this. this is a lot of dynamics at play, carl. walk us through just what is happening over the next 24 hours. >> sure, 4 you just saw harry reid already trying to blame republican john boehner for the house side's work before the senate's work is actually completed. that is what they are working on today. basically three votes today to watch for that are meant to wind up the senate immigration bill by tomorrow or friday. first today the senate is going
8:17 am
to vote on a republican point of order argue arguing that the gang of eight compromise bill violates the budget act because it taps social security revenue to pay for it to aeu sroeuz raising thavoid raising the deficit. republicans are very upset about. they are actually trying to wave the budget act. the second bill is a compromise border security amendment. there is a third hurdle that will require 60 votes to move forward with the angel of eight bill as amended. that will happen some time today, and they will workout a deal on amendments. reid still has work to do before he starts pointing fingers at the house where it will go next. jenna: you never know what is going to happen. the senate has gotten it to this point by july 1st. that was their goal. the battle in the house is something completely different. >> house speaker john boehner said the house could do a bill this year. he didn't guarantee it would be done soon. next week the congress is out
8:18 am
for the fourth of july. it's going to take a while it's not necessarily going to come from a anchor of bi-partisan lawmakers in the house so there is one. conservatives and tea party oppose the senate bill. they say it's weak on security and amounts for amnesty for people illegally now. there is a train wreck ahead. a much the fourth of july week they'll have four weeks of july itself. they take the entire month of august off. when they come back in september they will be battling over the aping you'll spending bills, the possible it built of a government shut down, and the looming deadline to raise the debt ceiling which republicans say they won't do without off setting spending cuts. there is a big problem with sequester never mind the farm bill that didn't get passed and got derailed a couple of weeks ago. all that is going to happen while they are be are working on the immigration bill in september and october at the end of the year? it is a huge train wreck waiting
8:19 am
to happen. and compromising on immigration, which they haven't been able to do is a big job. jenna: we'll keep our fingers crossed. there you go. >> who knows. >> carl, thank you. jon: a cleveland man charged withholding three young women captive for a decade is back in court today. what the hearing is about and how it may impact this case, plus, new reaction to the supreme court's ruling to strike down a key section of the landmark voting rights act that was created to prevent discrimination at polling places. democrats are furious, many republicans say they are pleased, juan williams and charlie hurt join us for a fair & balanced debate coming up. [ male announcer ] erica had a rough day.
8:20 am
there was this and this. she got a parking ticket... ♪ and she forgot to pay her credit card bill on time. good thing she's got the citi simplicity card. it doesn't charge late fees or a penalty rate. ever. as in never ever. now about that parking ticket. [ grunting ] [ male announcer ] the citi simplicity card is the only card that never has late fees, a penalty rate, or an annual fee, ever. go to to apply. and i'm here to tell homeowners that are 62 and older about a great way to live a better retirement. it's called a reverse mortgage.
8:21 am
[ male announcer ] call right now to receive your free dvd and booklet with no obligation. it answers questions like how a reverse mortgage works, how much you qualify for, the ways to receive your money, and more. plus, when you call now, you'll get this magnifier with l.e.d. light absolutely free. when you call the experts at one reverse mortgage today, you'll learn the benefits of a government-insured reverse mortgage. it will eliminate your monthly mortgage payments and give you tax-free cash from the equity in your home. and here's the best part -- you still own your home. take control of your retirement today. ♪ ♪
8:22 am
8:23 am
jenna: new reaction to the supreme court ruling striking down a key section of the landmark voting rights act passed to prevent discrimination at polling places. the high court requiring that certain areas get justice department approval before changing laws, they deemed it unconstitutional. it it applies to eight states youee in orang you see in orange. attorney general eric holder says he's deeply disappointed by the ruling but says the justice department will monster injures dirkses around the country. >> we will use every legal tool that remains to us against any jurisdiction that seeks to take advantage of the supreme court's ruling by hindering eligible citizens full and free exercise of the franchise. jenna: we'll get more to the rulings from today. this is one of the a big cases
8:24 am
as well before the sue bream courtcue bream court and we obviously got the ruling yesterday. peter doocy has more. >> the impact much the ruling is being felt. the supreme court decided that nobody here in d.c. neither needs to pre clear changes to stateee election procedures. states can change the way they conduct election -gs if they want and some are. down in texas beginning tomorrow anybody who wants to vote needs to have a photo id, and if potential voters don't have driver's licenses they must go get a free photo id from the state. leaders in mississippi have already also said they want quick changes to their state's voter id laws and supporters of this court's decision are pleased with the freedom the courts have given the states. >> our laws are one size fits all, not separate laws for georgia, and arizona that places like new york and idaho don't have to comply with.
8:25 am
so i think a great constitutional order has been restored today and that is a wonderful thing for our system of government. >> reporter: there was a lot of disappointment expressed by top obama administration officials yesterday. the president himself came out and called on congress to pass new legislation that guarantees equal access to the polls for all americans. that is something the naacp wants as well. >> congress in this moment must take this seriously, must seize this opportunity together in a bipartisan way, seek to reenact a measure that will protect the voting rights of those voters who have been vulnerable since 1965 when the voting rights act was first passed. >> reporter: this key part of the voting rights act was struck down yesterday by the supreme court in a 5-4 decision as close as can be and the same margin as the decisions in today's' same-sex marriage cases. jenna: thank you. jon: for more on the supreme
8:26 am
court decisions let's bring in juan williams, a fox news political anal lives. charlie hurt is also with us a columnist at the washington times. you're saying that the supreme court got it wrong, juan, why? >> i think the key to the argument, jon as presented by chief justice roberts was that this law is somewhat antiquated, s based, the pre clearance provision that you just heard discussed is based on data that came from the 1970s, it's 40 years old. there eufs no evidence that in fact these states are any more discriminatory in their practices than anybody else, any other state. but in fact as you just heard from peter, you have states like texas that were blocked in the last election cycle from gerrymandering some district, changing voter id laws that in fact were proven to the press minority voter turn out. this is a very current issue having people disenfranchised in this country. i would add one other quick fact
8:27 am
which is if you look at the politics of the moment there is real advantage to many republicans to depress minority turn out because minorities, blacks and latinos overwhelmingly vote for democrats. so there is a reason for one political party here to want to disinch franchise voters who support their opponents. jon: charlie doesn't every mythical party if it has control of the state house and the governor's office shall doesn't it do what it can to enhance its political prospects in the state? >> absolutely. but the important thing to remember here jon is that, you know, if there are legitimate claims of people being suppressed from voting, of people being denied their constitutional right to vote, the department of justice still has ever bit of authority to go in and investigate and take appropriate action. but the notion that somehow that it's an effort to supess legitimate voting by requiring people to present a photo id in order to vote, you need a photo id in order to buy a pack of
8:28 am
cigarettes or a can of of beer. the notion that this is an attempt to suppress legitimate votes from minorities i would argue is actually an attempt by liberals or democrats in order to advance their, you know, political standing through, you know, very, very questionable claims. jon: juan, i want everybody who is legally entitled to do so to be able to vote, but i also want to make sure that dead people aren't voting and people aren't voting four times and people who aren't citizens aren't voting. isn't an id and answer to all of that? >> it could be. but i mean look there is no evidence of voter fraud. if there was evidence of wide-spread voter fraud or people presenting fake id's or something i'd say we have a problem. we don't have a problem in that regard. what we have inventory stead as evidenced in the last election cycle is where people will jerry manne skwrer jerry manned der.
8:29 am
that this is really depressing the votes of black and latino voters. you had the supreme court overrule that. texas will go back on it. it's about purging voter rolls. closing polls in different areas. these are steps taken with the express intent of life. ing the power of minority voters who vote as i said earlier overwhelmingly democratic. >> i could not agree with you more about the sort of injustice and disgusting nature of all the gerrymandering based on racial profiling or racial discrimination. but you have to admit that the single most -- the strongest force requiring us to discriminate against voters based on race is the voting rights act of 1965. it requires that district be drawn based on the racial make up of the voters. and, you know, most of america has moved on, has moved past all
8:30 am
of this stuff and yet the federal government is requiring politicians to continue to build congressional district based on the race of voters, which i find patently offensive. and of course the politicians love it because they can -- it insures that they can remain in power. black politicians and white politicians work together and they trade these voters back and forth in order to get to stay in power. jon: we are going to continue to cover this issue. obviously the supreme court has spoken but it will be boiling in the weeks and months ahead as the justice department and others and the states actually make some changes. charlie hurt, juan williams, thank you both. >> thanks, jon. jenna: new controversy over the keystone pipeline project which would carry oil from canada all the way to texas if approved. now we are learning one company stands to gain millions and millions of dollars if the project is not approved. and apparently this company has some sort of connection to the president. we'll explain coming up. nsa leaker edward snowden
8:31 am
believed to be in a moscow airport in the transit lounge, jon, just hanging out. jon: hope he's got a shower. jenna: russia refuses to hand him over to the united states. ambassador john bolton joining us next with his take on our response to the russians.
8:32 am
8:33 am
8:34 am
8:35 am
a fudge tiff wanted by our country. former nsa edward snowden is still in a moscow airport. ef flew out of hong kong on sunday where he had been hiding out every since admitting to leaking information on our government secret surveillance programs. he's wanted in the united states on charges of espionage. just to remind you, russian president vladimir putin confirmed form the first time that snowden is in a moscow airport. he said snowden is still in a transit station and so he's technically not in russian. he refuses to extradict him. this reaction from john mccain. >> at first he said he's not in russian. that is the classic old soviet union double speak.
8:36 am
technically because he's in the lounge at the airport he was not technically in russia. look, this is the kind of cold war old soviet speak kind of behavior that has characterized colonel putin, colonel in the k tpw-rbgs b fo kkgb. we have known it for a longtime. maybe we'll wake up and have a realistic approach in our relations with russia. >> john bolton joins us. he's been to the moscow airport many a times. we keep on saying a edward snowden is in a transit area like it's some sort of legitimate place, like, oh he's just in the grocery store or on the street. what are we really talking about here? >> the notion that because he hasn't gone through russian customs somehow he's in a different place than the country called russia is utterly ridiculous.
8:37 am
what makes it so insulting is putin is a lawyer, he knows it's ridiculous. snowden came under russian jurisdiction when his airplane crossed into russian air space. russian security officials could have opened the cabin door and pulled him off the plane and arrested him then. the fact that russia doesn't have an extradition treaty with the united states is yo utterly irrelevant. russia has control over him. they could deliver him back if they wanted to. they don't want to for several reasons. the most important and most dangerous is they are trying to get everything they can off his computers, copying his documents and debriefing him on what he knows personally. jenna: you say what putin is saying is ridiculous. do we valu validate it then with some sort of response or not? >> well, i think if they don't turn him over we should start responding. honestly we should have started responding to the chinese when he left hong kong. they obviously didn't pay any attention to our diplomacy either. to the extent there is any chance to influence russia it
8:38 am
would help to start peen hraoeudzing china. there are several things we could do. withdraw our ambassador from beijing. withdraw our consul general from hong kong. put all the activities on ice. go beyond that in the case of china and allow all taiwan niece officials to travel to the ooh neated states to receive twaoeu juan niece diplomats in the state-of-the-state department building. that will send the signal to moscow that your turn is next if you let snowden go. jenna: a spokesperson said we agree with president putin we do not want this issue to negatively impact our bilateral relation -ts. what bilateral relations are we hoping to preserve by having a little response sth. >> look, they are putting -- the russians are putting their thumb in our eye, they enjoy doing it. they are already damaging our national security by whatever
8:39 am
information they are getting from snowden. i understand why the administration may not want to be too public about this. but the notion that somehow we can placate the russians after what they are doing to us just reinforces in the mind of putin, the russian prime minister and others that we are weenies and they can push us around and get away with it and that's what they won't to do. jenna: are we, though, ambassador i mean at this point? >> we are certainly weenies with respect to the chinese. they have defied our clear wishes, they've protected snowden in getting out of hong kong and suffered no consequences. the russians must be judging that they are not going to suffer any consequences either. so it's no wonder that they are playing games with us. look, putin understands exactly what the situation is. do you think if we had a russian citizen that they wanted that they would be pussy footing around like this to? forget about it. they think they can get away with this. they don't care about our
8:40 am
diplomacy. they apparently don't think there will be any consequences and i think this applies not just to the case of edward snowden, this is what they think about the united states under barack obama. jenna: while this is all happening i'm seeing one of the first reports from the associated press that goes into detail about how al-qaida, specifically the group -- the al-qaida group in yemen is already changing the way that they are operating due to the information per the leaks. there is a lot at play here ambassador. >> absolutely. jenna: we are out of time for today. thank you so much. >> thank you much. jon: let's get to the new controversy over the keystone pipeline project. it is expected to carry crude oil from canada all the way to refineries in texas. yesterday president obama suggested he's still considering whether or not to approve the project. today there is growing controversy as we learn that a company formerly belonging to a top donor of the president stands to gain millions if the project is not approved. john roberts is live in atlanta
8:41 am
with that. >> reporter: good morning to you john. the man at the center of all of this is tom stier, billionair bill hedge fund person and top donor to barack obama. he has launched a social media campaign to try to kill the pipeline. >> we really cannot afford 40 to 50 years of development of a humongous oil reserve that is twice as bad. >> teier may stand to gain financially. i founded and still has investments with a company that has major positions in oil, including a company that is trying to expand a competing pipeline in canada from to export oil from canada's west coast. lee terry says stier is trying to have it both ways. >> there is a lot of hints of hypocrisy here. he has offshore oil, mining
8:42 am
interests, maybe he'll divest himself but he certainly spent 25 years building up that portfolio for his capital management or hedge fund. >> here is ou they can benefit from all of this. there are pre proposed pipelines coming from the oil sands in northern alberta. there is the northern gateway and the keystone and the transmountain pipeline that he he is invested with with kinder morgan. they want to expand that pipeline. looks like northern gate which is not going to be halt. if keystone is killed as well that will leave transmountain as the only game in town. the plan is to carry 900,000 barrels of order each and every day from the oil sands to vancouver. that is more than the keystone pipeline will carry. stier left the country last year. he says he wants them to shed all his investments in oil coal and kinder morgan.
8:43 am
it's unclear where he is in that process. the device the has been taking place consistent with the applicable legal requirement. there is still a lot of opacity here on just how i vested he is in the oil and pipeline inventoried straoe. jon: as pipeline proponents point out the oil will not just stay in the ground if keystone is not built. >> reporter: they make that argument that it will stay in the ground. awe canadian officials have insisted they'll get it out somehow whether it's through the transmountain pipeline, rail, ship or truck they want to develop the tar sands and sell that oil. jon: john roberts in atlanta thank you. jenna: brand-new details revealed about the night george zimmerman shot and killed trayvon martin. what neighbors are saying in today's testimony and what the judge just ruled that could make a big difference in this case. plus, a texas-size political mess in the lone star state all chaos breaking out during a key
8:44 am
vote on abortion. we'll explain just ahead. ♪
8:45 am
8:46 am
♪ proud to stand on our own ♪ proud to be homegrown ♪ a familiar face and a name you know ♪ ♪ can you hear it? ♪ fueling the american spirit ♪ no matter when, no matter where ♪ ♪ marathon will take you there [ male announcer ] with the new marathon visa credit card, you earn up to 25 cents per gallon off marathon purchases.
8:47 am
jon: right now we are monitoring today's testimony in the george zimmerman murder trial, revealing brand new details about the night zimmerman shot and killed trayvon martin. phil keating is live in sanford, florida, for us. phil? >> reporter: jon, more emotion and tears in the courtroom. a major ruling by this judge and the first witness to declare
8:48 am
george zimmerman was not the person screaming for help. going live inside the courtroom right now, another bench conference underway, but on the stand is jeff nay ma knoll low who testified the large e person during the fight on top she believes husband george zimmerman -- she believes was george zimmerman. roughly 54 minutes after trayvon martin was at 7/eleven. >> oh, my god -- [inaudible] >> the officer's there, he has somebody -- they're going to handle the situation from here. >> no. oh, my god. somebody's been shot. >> reporter: the despair in that shot provoking tears yet again from the mother of trayvon martin and clearly affected the jurors. one looked up, another down, all appeared somber. and then the witness declared the person screaming for help was the person who ultimately died.
8:49 am
>> well, in my opinion i truly believe especially the second yell for help that was like a, you know, a yelp, it was excruciating, i really felt it was the boy's voice. >> reporter: and a major ruling this morning by judge deborah nelson and a victory for the prosecution. five previous 911 calls made by the neighborhood watch leader about suspicious black people walking in his neighborhood are relevant to this murder trial. >> there was a break-in in my neighborhood recently. two black males. >> can you describe the two individuals? >> two african-american males do. >> white, black or hispanic? >> black. >> reporter: prosecutors intend to use those previous 911 calls to convince this jury george zimmerman's state of mind the night he shot and killed trayvon martin was one of anger and frustration at multipull billion suspicious people previously getting away.
8:50 am
also, one juror has been dismissed, b72, the hispanic male alternate known as the arm wrestler, the judge said it was unrelated to this trial. jon: phil keating in sanford, florida, keeping an eye on that trial for us. thank you, phil. jenna: breaking details, new details, in fact, in another case entirely. the arrest of nfl player aaron to hernandez as police investigate a murder. a live report straight ahead. every day we're working to be an even better company -
8:51 am
and to keep our commitments. and we've made a big commitment to america. bp supports nearly 250,000 jobs here. through all of our energy operations, we invest more in the u.s. than any other place in the world. in fact, we've invested over $55 billion here in the last five years - making bp america's largest energy investor. our commitment has never been stronger.
8:52 am
8:53 am
jenna: a fox news alert now, aaron hernandez is released by his team, the new england patriots, but that may be the least of his problems after his arrest this morning. you're seeing the footage we have of that. investigators continue to search his home and nearby looking for clues of the semipro football
8:54 am
player whose body was found a mile from the nfl star's luxury home. >> reporter: we're outside of the district court, this is where aaron hernandez is expected to be arraigned later on this afternoon, and just speaking with the court clerk, they didn't have a time for that arraignment just yet, but they said the court is running as usual today, and they have an expectation that it's likely that it could happen later on this afternoon. aaron hernandez, of course, arrested early this morning before 9:00 this morning. the massachusetts state police releasing a statement saying that afterwards they were bringing him to the at l borrow police station and eventually would end up in court here today. no word on the charges, but the bristol county district attorney is expected to come out and speak to the press following this arraignment and to offer some sort of statement. the charges, of course, are likely to be read in court during that arraignment, of course. the patriots have announced they
8:55 am
are no longer going to have aaron hernandez has a member of their team. they have released him in light of this investigation. in their statement they said that a young man was murdered last week, and we extend our sympathies to the family and friends who mourn his loss. words cannot express the disappointment we feel knowing that one of our players was arrested as a result of this investigation. we realize law enforcement investigations are ongoing, and we support their efforts and respect the process. at this time we believe this transaction is simply the right thing to do. that transaction, of course, being to let aaron hernandez go, he is no longer a member of the patriots. that's the latest we have here right now. we've been keeping an eye on the courthouse and we will, of course, keep you posted when aaron hernandez and his attorneys arrive here today. back to you. jenna: sounds good, molly. we're going to have legal analysts deciding on what's the next step here. thank you. jon: landmark rulings today from the united states supreme court. the justices strike down a law that denied federal benefits to
8:56 am
legally-married gay couples. we are live outside the high court with the latest. plus, breaking details in the benghazi investigation. the head of u.s. special operations command in africa testifying in a closed door meeting before congress for the first time right now. will this be the day we finally get an answer as to why special forces were told to stand down on the night of the attack?
8:57 am
8:58 am
8:59 am
9:00 am
>> reporter: and we are live in the "happening now" control room. a busy news day and a brand new hour over the next 60 minutes including mr. edward snowden, there he is. but where is he really? are u.s. officials any closer to bringing him back to face charges in america? the latest on the nsa leaker as lawmakers get set for a classified briefing on those secret surveillance programs that he uncovered. also money perhaps swollen off this swiss air jet, a lot of it, but wait until you hear the money that was left behind, $92 million the thieves could have gotten but doesn't. we'll have the whole story on that. and another court date for the man accused of holding three women captive in his cleveland home. the latest on ariel castro. all of that and breaking news as the latest hour of "happening now" starts right now. jenna: welcome the second hour of "happening now," everybody, i'm jenna lee. jon: and i'm jon scott. "happening now," supporters of
9:01 am
gay marriage are hailing two rulings from the u.s. supreme court handed down just a short time ago. first, the high court strikes down the federal defense of marriage act known as doe ma, ruling that -- doma, ruling that legally-married, same-sex couple should get the same benefits as heterosexual couples. they also made a ruling that may clear the path for same-sex marriage in california. what was the court's reasoning in striking down doma, shannon? >> reporter: essentially, jon, it came down to how couples were treated and whether it was fair to treat same-sex couples differently under federal law than those married in a traditional marriage. it's interesting because, of course, doma doesn't actually say anything about the legality of same-sex marriage itself. it simply says if your state recognizes same-sex marriage, then the federal government cannot deny benefits to you, some 1100 or so benefits, tax laws and other benefits. the federal government has no
9:02 am
say in the matter. they're leaving this to the states, essentially. in the opinion authored by justice kennedy, a 5-4 opinion, he says the statute's invalid for no legitimate purpose overcomes the effect to disparage and injure -- he wraps it by treating those people as less respected than others, the federal statute is in violation of the fifth amendment. essentially, jon, doma is unconstitutional. jon: but it's also important here to note what the court didn't do today, right? >> reporter: well, in both this decision and the decision that dealt with proposition 8, the court didn't make a sweeping ruling that gay marriage should be legalized across the country. it stopped far, far short of doing that. in california it really limited alone, the dispute over prop 8, the voters wanted to amend the state constitution to recognize marriage as only between a man and a woman. what the court found was the
9:03 am
plaintiffs who brought the case were not the proper parties to have standing to bring this dispute to the court. so what they did, essentially, was invalidate the decisions based on those particular parties. that means the lowest court ruling in this case which kicked out proposition 8 is the law of the land. again, the court didn't get to the merits of same-sex marriage, it simply got to that technical legal issue. jon: and it sounds like they are still roaring about it outside the supreme court right now. >> reporter: a lot of celebration by those who had hoped for these decisions today continues here at the court, jon. jon: shannon bream outside the court, thank you. jenna: well, now to a big story out of the state of texas on another very controversial issue. a filibuster helps to defeat what would have been one of the toughest abortion laws in the country. when the bill's backers pushed for a last minute vote, angry crowds made their voices heard. casey steegal's live in dallas, a ways away from the statehouse, but certainly with a front row seat on what's happening in
9:04 am
texas. casey? >> reporter: yeah, jenna. it was a wild night that lasted early into the morning hours. you know, the goal of the democrats in the state senate yesterday was to filibuster this controversial bill because the special legislative session here in texas ended at midnight, and the bill had to be voted on before that time. so yesterday around 11:00 in the afternoon senator wendy davis can, a democrat from ft. worth, started talking, and she had to speak for more than ten hours straight, no bathroom breaks, no leaning on the podium, no help from colleagues, and she was mostly successful because it went right up to the wire at midnight. but the state's lieutenant governor, david dewhurst, a republican who supported the measure, says that the chaos and the noise you can see here from the hundreds of protesters who filled the capitol building actually prevented the bill from being signed in time, so it did not pass by a matter of minutes. despite some rumors that it had, this is concerned a major
9:05 am
victory now for proto-choice supporters. -- pro-choice supporters. >> the government cannot decide that. >> i'm just here to stand up for what i believe in. >> reporter: now, s.b. 5 is what it was called, and it would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. it would require abortion clinics to upgrade their facilities to be classified as ambulatory surgical centers, and it would also mandate that doctors carrying out the procedures have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. supporters and authors of this bill have said that this was all to improve women's health, but opponents argued that it would do just the opposite, because they say 37 clinics around the state of texas would be forced to close because it wouldn't meet the requirements leaving just five open in this massive state that would be able to carry out the procedure. now, there has already been some talk circulating that texas governor rick perry, who also supported the bill, will call
9:06 am
another special session to get this passed. keep in the mind republicans do have the vote to get it passed because it cleared the house earlier in the week. so it's going to be interesting to see what happens with this issue that is certainly not over yet, jenna. jenna: we'll keep an eye on it, casey, thank you. jon: new developments from all over the globe in the manhunt for nsa leaker edward snowden. ecuador is now asking the u.s. to submit a written position regarding snowden's political alie lumbar -- asylum request. meanwhile, russian president putin insists russia will not send him to the united states. now, this all comes as we await a classified briefing for house lawmakers from the nsa director and other intelligence chiefs. our chief intelligence correspondent be catherine herridge is live in washington with more for us. what do we know about snowden's travel plans, catherine? >> reporter: well, jon, ecuador's foreign minister also says it could take months to make a decision on his bid for
9:07 am
asylum in that country, and authorities in iceland say they don't usually consider applications until someone is on their soil. and this morning the latest information indicates snowden remains in this transit area of the moscow airport. the russian embassy in washington telling fox this morning that a transit visa is good for three days, after that you need a tourist visa, and in both cases you typically apply before you enter russia, but this is knot a typical case -- not a typical case. today we were told there is no current or active reservations for snowden. one ticket was canceled, but the destination was not available anymore in their computer system. according to the journalist who published the classified documents, snowden has an insurance policy of sorts. he, quote, has taken extreme precautions to make sure many different people around the world have these archives to insure the stories will inevitably be published. greenwald added the people in possession cannot access them
9:08 am
yet because they are highly encrypted and they do not have passwords. but if anything happens to snowden, that will be the context in which they get access to those files, jon. jon: what about the 50 plots that the nsa said that these programs that he exposed had foiled? >> reporter: well, when you compare and caron travis the nsa director's statements, it seems the language is seeming to limit the direct role of the programs. just listen to general keith alexander's testimony before the senate last week. >> in recent years these programs, together with other intelligence, have protected the u.s. and our allies from terrorist threats across the globe to include helping prevent the potential terrorist events over 50 times since 9/11. >> reporter: but in the statement to nsa employees last night, alexander said the programs which include the sweeping collection of americans' phone records flushed out the intelligence community's comprehension of these plots. quote: on the 21st of june, we
9:09 am
provided over 50 cases to both the house and senate intelligence committees that show the specific contribution of these programs to our understanding. and in many cases disruption of terrorist plots in the u.s. and over 20 countries throughout the world. that list of 50 plots went to congress on friday, two days after it was promised by general alexander, jon. jon: catherine herridge in washington, thank you. jenna: right now on capitol hill, a major hearing in the benghazi investigation. for the very first time, the house armed services committee is questioning two of the men in charge of u.s. military operations in that region during the attack where four americans were murdered. chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel is live on capitol hill with more on this. >> reporter: hi, jenna. lawmakers tell us they've been looking forward to getting answers to questions they've had since the benghazi raid. retired general carter hamm who led the afterrah come command is believed to be telling members of congress in a classified
9:10 am
setting what kind of military assets were available in and around libya last september 11th. buck mckeon provided us with his thoughts going into the hearing. >> there have been things that people said that there were orders to stand down. i want to find out what those orders were. i want to find out what the position, what our posture was, our military posture leading up to the attack, what we've learned from the attack and what our posture is going forward. >> reporter: the benghazi attack which claimed the lives of four americans took place on an anniversary of the 9/11 attacks in this country. others testifying today include the key figure at the special operations command in africa and the army lieutenant colonel who was in libya and told to stand down when he and other special forces were ready to go to benghazi. >> what happened with those personnel? >> they remained in tripoli with us. the medic went with the nurse to the hospital to lend his skills
9:11 am
to the treatment of our and care of our wounded. >> how did the personnel react at being told to stand down? >> they were furious. i can only say -- well, i will quote lieutenant colonel gibson. he said, this is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more balls than somebody in the military. >> reporter: lawmakers who oversee the military, the armed services committee, obviously wanted to hear from key members of the military about the events of that day. at the same time, this committee's also trying to get a classified timeline from the pentagon about the benghazi attack. jon? jenna: mike emanuel live on capitol hill, thank you. jon: well, the fallout from a series of scandals. what brand new fox polls are saying about the president's sinking job performance rating among a key group of voters. plus, major ruling from the nation's highest court.
9:12 am
what they mean for legally-married, same-sex couples right now and for the future of same-sex marriage in this country. ♪ ♪ let's play: [ all ] who's new in the fridge! i help support bones... [ ding! ] ...the immune system... [ ding! ] ...heart health... [ ding! ] ...and muscles. [ ding! ] that can only be ensure complete! [ female announcer ] the four-in-one nutrition of ensure complete. a simple choice to help u eat right. [ major nutrition ] nutrition in charge. these are sandra's "homemade" yummy, scrumptious bars. hmm? i just wanted you to eat more fiber. chewy, oatie, gooeyness... and fraudulence. i'm in deep, babe. you certainly are. [ male announcer ] fiber one.
9:13 am
to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again.
9:14 am
and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap.
9:15 am
jon: well, president obama's job appl rating is sinking fast among a key group of voters. we're talking about independents. according to the very latest fox news polls, only 31% of independents approve of the job the president is doing. that's a drop of a dozen points from the same time last year. and look at the reversal from june of four years ago. back then two-thirds of independents gave the president's job performance a thumbs up. so he's down more than 50% in that category. bill is editorial page editor for the new york post. is this the same kind of thing
9:16 am
that happens to every second term president, or is this worse somehow? >> well, i think it's worse in this sense. president obama came to office promising us a generation of smart government. now, his government was not just supposed to be smart, but also big. i think this is the consequence of big government. i mean, compare this to bill clinton when he left office, you know, his scandals were largely personal. but bill clinton was the one that told us the era of big government is over. now we have the irs, the state department, the justice department, the nsa -- which i actually think is defensible. but it doesn't look very smart to the average citizen out there. jon: well, let's look at the way voters view his handling of the government's surveillance scandal, and they don't seem to like the way he's handling that either. only 32% approve of the way president obama is handling that nsa scandal. 61% be disapprove. now, there's a lot of moving parts to that. >> right. jon: some people probably don't
9:17 am
like the fact that the surveillance exists, some people probably don't like the way he has handled edward snowden. but overall, almost two-thirds disapprove. >> yeah. i think a lot of the nsa scandal, so to speak, has to do with the other scandals. we're asked to trust this government. when we see that this is the same government that fed us a cock a maimmy story on what happened in benghazi, that's spying on fox reporters, you know, from the attorney general's office. so i'm actually very sympathetic to the president on the nsa thing. i think there's a lot of stuff that's confused here, and as you say, some of that could be people upset that this guy is traveling around the world and in china and russia and these other leaders are thumbing their nose at us. jon: well, you know, i guess i kind of see the need for the nsa to be gathering information. on that level i don't have a problem with it. but at the same time when you find out that the irs is then gathering information about people's political views --
9:18 am
>> right. jon: -- that makes it a little dicey. >> yeah. i think that there is a distinction. and one of the distinctions is i think generally when it comes to war-fighting issues and so forth, there's a lot more oversight. you know, the nsa programs were briefed to members of congress, you know, looked at by a fisa judge and so forth and have executive oversight. there's a lot of protocols. if you know the nsa, i happen to know some of these programs from when i was in the bush administration, and we had to write about them. and, you know, a lot of good people and i think a lot of protocols. i don't think those exist at the irs or the apa. we tend to think those are benign groups, but if you're the target of one of those groups, you know, a lot more pain. and look, let's look at it this way, no one's shown the nsa has done anything illegal. the irs, on the other hand, has been illegally targeting people because of their beliefs. jon: and the voters' attitude about the administration's handling of all of this is
9:19 am
reflected in their calls for more congressional investigation. asked whether congress should continue to investigate some of these scandals, 73% be, yeah, go after what happened with the irs. 71% say go after more information on benghazi and the nsa, and the department of justice, justice has 70% of -- >> yeah. i would say if i had to explain it, i would say the era of distrust of big government is back. jon: back with us, yeah. [laughter] clearly, people think that there are other shoes -- >> and they're right. jon: well, and, again, you know, when this is the president who decried, for instance, what he saw as president bush's misuse of the patriot act -- >> right. jon: -- things like that, and then you learn that the nsa is gathering all of this information, that leads to distrust -- >> and this is why i said it's worse. i'm not sure it's worse that people, that president obama is less popular. it's worse because it's more damaging to a liberal president
9:20 am
that depends on government. look, one of the things about the irs driving this is people realize that the same people that were targeting conservative groups on their organizations for their political beliefs are going to be handling obamacare. so, you know, when you're a conservative, you believe in smaller government. you're not surprised when government doesn't work. when you're president obama, you're el thing us that his -- you're telling us that his staff can run the auto industry, got your irs officials taking the fifth, you've got a bigger problem. jon: bill, thank you. >> thank you. jenna: well, some brand new numbers on the economy out today. what they mean for your bottom line as well as for our nation's economy and what's ahead. plus, more than a million dollars missing from a swiss air flight at new york's kennedy airport. you won't believe what the thief or thieves actually left behind. we're live at the breaking news desk with this incredible story.
9:21 am
9:22 am
9:23 am
9:24 am
for a store near you go to jon: well, thieves make off with more than a million dollars in a brazen heist, but they left behind a whole lot more. rick folbaum live in the newsroom with that story. >> reporter: jon, this was cash that was headed from switzerland to new york. the federal reserve bank of new york, to be exact. except somewhere between zurich and jfk airport more than a million dollars of it went missing. government bankers noticed they were short while they were counting the loot monday morning in lower manhattan. twelve bundles of $100 bills, each bundle worth a hundred grand gone. the fbi says it's investigating, of course, but get this. as you mentioned, whoever took it must have wished they had a bigger duffel bag because $92 million was left behind.
9:25 am
now, one theory is that the money was taken before the swiss air flight took off from switzerland by somebody who knew about the shipment, saw the crates, poked some kind of a hole in one of those crates, reached in and pulled that money out. but "the new york post," owned by the same parent company as fox news, quoting sources who say that authorities believe the robbery was an inside job, that the money was actually stolen after the plane landed here in new york. the post says that airport employees who may have had access to where that money was unloaded will be given lie detector tests. we'll let you know if any of the missing cash turns up. jon: so millions of dollars just in those big squarish shipping containers that they put in the belly of a plane. >> reporter: that's right. millions and millions of dollars. apparently, some wear and tear on the containers, so some do have some puncture holes, but the hole where the money was taken was bigger than usual. [laughter] jon: interesting. jenna: sounds like a cartoon. jon: rick folbaum, thanks.
9:26 am
jenna: so if you see any of that money, call authorities, all right? some brand new numbers on the economy today, speaking of money. and, quite frankly, they're disappointing when it comes to expectations. the government says the annual rate of 1.8% in the first three months of the year, and that's significantly lower or slower or both than first thought. fox business network's jo ling kent joins us with a little bit more on these numbers. >> hi, jenna. the u.s. economy grew at an even slower pace than previously estimated in the first quarter of this year. more information on spending came in after the number was originally reported. the gdp number, which was first 2.5%, has been revised down to a final 1.8%. why? because new signs that growth actually slowed down in recent months. take a look. consumer spending, which makes up two-thirds of economic output, was down. americans spent less on services like personal care, health care and legal services. according to the department of commerce.
9:27 am
and business fixed investment spending also dropped lower than previously estimated. companies reduced spending on power, communication, infrastructure, equipment and software. now, despite the disappointing numbers, the stock market is up today. it may seem counterspew ty, but bad news on the economy has been good for the markets lately which have been concerned when the federal reserve will pull back the stimulus. worse than estimated numbers give the fed more reason to potentially keep that going. jenna in. jenna: jo, i think this is the first time we've spoke since you joined the team over at fox business. >> it is. jenna: welcome to you, and thank you for the great report. look forward to having you back. thanks. >> reporter: thanks, jenna. jon: well, the supreme court's landmark rulings on two gay marriage cases. reaction is pouring in the now. we're live with some of that for you. also, in-depth analysis. and another tearful apology for a big personality in the cooking world. will the apology turn things
9:28 am
around for paula deen?
9:29 am
9:30 am
9:31 am
jon: new reaction tow the supreme court ruling on california's proposition 8, the one that banned same-sex marriage in that state. the justices essentially cleared the way for gay marriage in the nation's largest state. it's going to be up to the state.
9:32 am
claudia cowan live in san francisco. >> it wasn't the broad ruling they hoped for but a huge victory for same-sex couples in california who who have been waiting for years to get married. they are celebrating on the steps of san francisco's city hall. they will fight to limit it to the sue couples who challenged the ban on gay marriage. there could be more legal wrangling to come. in san francisco they say marriages could begin in a couple of weeks. rallies are planned across the state today and tonight including a big gathering in san francisco's castro district. all ahead of this weekend's big pride parade which will have extra significance. jon: all in this in a place where california's battle for gay marriage tpwaoe ar began. >> reporter: theres ruling is
9:33 am
important to the couple. they were the plaintiffs in the landmark case that made it all the way to the support court. an emotional chris perry said her goal from the start to us to send a message of equality especially to the children of gay couples. >> are today we can go back to california and say to our own children, all four of our boys, your family is just as good as everybody else's family, we love you as much as anybody else's parents love their kids and we are going to be equal. now we will be married and equal to every other family in california. thank you. [applause] >> by one estimate some 24,000 same-sex couples here in california are ready to tie the knot right now. jon: claudia cowan in san francisco. thank you. jenna: the supreme court issued another major ruling on gay marriage today aside from california's prop 8, the high court striking down a key component to the federal defense
9:34 am
of marriage act or doma. justice kennedy argued essentially that doma was inch coaching on the state's power to protect its citizens if the state approves same-sex marriage writing, quotes when the state used its historic and essential authority to define the marital relation in this way its role and power in making the decision enhanced the recognition, dignity and protection of the class in their own community. doma because of its reach and extent departs from this history, and tradition of reliance on state law to define marriage. let's bring in sally coen a fox news contributor who served as an advocate for gay rights. brian anderson is the coauthor of the book "what is marriage, man and woman and defense. welcome to both of you. today we have a lot of issues to work through here. i don't want to start a conversation on the merits of same-sex marriage or not. i want to talk about the role of government. that is a theme we see in a lot
9:35 am
of the big stories, whether it's immigration or healthcare or anything else. it seems as if the supreme court today made a big statement about that relationship. sally, you wrote a peace it went up on that fits in perfectly with this titled what same-sex marriage decision tells us about america and the constitution. what do you think it tells us? >> it's within our long history as a nation of thriving toward making a more perfect union. we know that, you know, throughout our history we've never quite gotten there. we have had times in our history where we have legally treated certain groups of people as though they were superior to other groups of people and we've over time worked to address that. this is what the court is doing right now. it's fundamentally recognizing that you cannot pass laws under our constitution, under our american values you cannot pass laws solely for the purpose much discriminating. i would also add they are doing it in a very clever way where they are relying on the states rights argument, were this any other issue conservatives would
9:36 am
be cheering but in this case somehow conservatives want the federal government to step on the toes of the state. jenna: scalia said they are overruling what elected representatives have put forward as representatives of the public. what do you think of what sally has to say and again how we're looking at this relationship between the judicial branch, the federal government and the state government and the local community. >> justice scalia got it right. the federal government has constitutional authority to define marriage for federal purposes and policies. just as the 50 states have authority to define marriage for state purposes and for state policies. what gets the constitution wrong is if you say that the states with impose their definition on the federal government. so the court as a whole, they kind of issued a contradictory ruling today saying the states are free to define marriage how they want and didn't allow the citizens of california who went to the ballot box twice to pass a law defining marriage as the
9:37 am
union of a man and woman so that children can have moms and dads. they didn't uphold that law, they said the citizens of california didn't have standing to defend their law. and yet they then say that in the doma decision that states should be sovereign to define marriage for state purposes. jenna: where do you think that -- where do you think the individual turns to the government for that definition about what marriage is? is it appropriate in the local community in the city? is it in the state government, or is it in the federal government ultimately? >> it's both. the states have to define marriage for state law and the federal government for federal law. what is important here is to say why is government is in the marriage business? government is not in the marriage business because it cares about the love life of consenting adults. marriage is not just about romance. the reason the government is in the marriage business is because the union of a man and woman can proceed tkwaous a child and children need a mom and dad and marriage is the is taougs that makes sure that takes place. jenna: since we've had this
9:38 am
ruling about several benefits, we have it when it comes to tax policy, this is one of the reasons why the debate came up recording doma because of the federal benefits if you were a same-sex couple like in a state new york you wouldn't be able to get that. beyond that i do believe that another argument should come before the supreme court, that the supreme court should make a sweeping statement on marriage and marriage rights in this country? is that the right place for this debate to go next, or is it something that should take place in the states and we have a country where maybe half the states say it's legal and half the states say it isn't in. >> i think we'll get there eventually anyway, one way or the other. either there will be a challenge to the many efforts of states that have tried to ban marriage equality, or the states will eventually get this on their own. the reality here is the reason we have -- what the government has said of and what we have a constitution for is to say you cannot make law, you are not allowed to make laws in this country that are solely for the purpose of discrimination.
9:39 am
no matter all the excuses that ryan wants to put forward, that's what is happening here. it's saying we want to treat families like mine as legally second-class status to other families. and it's not just for purposes of child rearing and so forth, a child, it's also for tax policy and immigration policy and hospital visitation and a thousand federal benefits most of which have nothing to do with anything but, you know, conferring rights on loving couples. jenna: i want to get it right -- we will remember have to run. >> let me respond to that. jenna: go ahead, ryan. >> citizens in the state of california went to the ballot box twice to pass a law that tells the truth about marriage, that it's a union of a man and a woman and we have laws like that in 38 states. the supreme court today rejected the argument that those laws are unconstitutional. the supreme court said today that those laws aren't violations of equal protection because the union of a man and a woman is different than the union of two men or two women. only the union of a man and a woman can produce a child and only that union can provide a
9:40 am
child with a mom and a dad, so marriage laws recognize that reality and they promote it as the ideal. jenna: it's interesting when you mention california. the voters went and made that decision and the elected officials made a different decision. >> in a democracy it's by the people, the people -- jenna: that's the fine question, guys. do you think this should be on a national ballot? do you see this issue as somehow having a place on a national forum and just being about the people and the voters. >> apart from the fact that i'm a little confused as to how my right to marry affects ryan at all, unless we are getting married ryan. you're entitled to your personal opinions, everyone was in. this and khoul the cases make clear churches and individuals get to do what they want. it says our government cannot discriminate. we don't legislate in this country based on popular opinion or on ideals when it comes to rights. jenna: not a national vote. >> this is what is right is right, jenna it's not based on popularity. >> we hrepbl late based on the
9:41 am
common good and we leave all americans free to live how they choose. in every state two people of the same-sex can love each other and live with each other, nothing about that is illegal. the question is are we going to redefine marriage and are force a new definition of marriage on all citizens on religious tkpwraoufps an groups. if that is going to happen it should be through the court. jenna: there was no sweeping statement overall by the sue bream court about marriage in general, and that's a debate we'll continue to have. we hope to have you both back. hopefully no marriages between the two of you because i think we'd have to put you on camera together. >> thank you. jon: a man accused of holding three women hostage for years in a house of horrorses, h horrors he goes from front of a judge. a rising star in the nfl goes before a court today.
9:42 am
what charges he may be facing when he is arraigned later today. our legal panel takes a look at both. ... ...
9:43 am
... let's play:
9:44 am
[ all ] who's new in the fridge! i help support bones... [ ding! ] ...the immune system... [ ding! ] ...heart health... [ ding! ] ...and muscles. [ ding! ] that can only be ensure complete! [ female announcer ] the four-in-one nutrition of ensure complete. a simple choice to help u eat right. [ major nutrition ] nutrition in charge.
9:45 am
jon: right now an nfl player linked to a murder investigation set to be arraigned in massachusetts. aaron hernandez arrested and led out of his home in handcuffs a week after a man described as an associate of his was found dead just a mile from his house. the charges he will face are not clear at this time. just a couple of hours after we saw him in handcuffs the new
9:46 am
england patriots cut their ties with hernandez. let's talk about it with our legal panel today, rebecca rose woodland is a trial attorney. ken patowitz a former prosecut prosecutor. we know that he is being charged with obstruction of justice. we don't know anything more until he is officially arraigned. one would think that the patriots have inside knowledge about what lies ahead for him. you don't cut ties to a guy unless there are serious charges coming against i him, right? >> that may be the case but it's hard to speculate exactly what the charges are being presented today in court. of it may be just obstruction of justice charges and those are not minor charges in related to a homicide investigation. those are serious, felony charges. and that in and of itself may be gave the team pause as to why they want to cut their ties with the player. it's hard to speculate exactly
9:47 am
what the charges will be. suffice it to say these are serious charges and a serious homicide investigation is undergoing right now considering the death in this particular case. jon: one of the problems he'll face now is he apparently won't have access to the huge contract that he had. he's got to hire a team of criminal defense lawyers, and he's not going to be getting an income. >> that is absolutely right. the issue here is i believe he may have a morals clause in his contract that the patriotics might have enforced ned immediately. any interaction with law authorities regarding an arrest they might have said in the morals clause that they had specifically with this mayor due to his previous situations, they may have said they are going to release him with the contract. doesn't mean they can't recontract him later on. right now they are stepping out of this immediately, he will not be paid from -- most ordinarily when uri leased from a contract in this situation you're not
9:48 am
paid. there may be some sort of payment plan in his contract, everyone has a different one specifically and the nfl has a basic one. jon: roger goodell the lead commissioner has made player conduct a center piece of his administration. he is telling everyone that all of the nfl players that they represent the shield, the so-called nfl shield the logo there. let's turn our attention to the awful case out of ohio, ariel castro back in court today. rebecca, the death penalty apparently is still on the table because of the fact that help is alleged to have punched one of his victims, one of the women he was keeping in the stomach to the point that she aborted. what are the chances of a plea deal here? the defense has said they are open to that. >> well, you know, if i were the defense attorney in this case i would be begging for a plea deal. ohio does have a fetal death
9:49 am
statute, that if the prosecution can prove he did kill a child they believe a life begins in the fetal stage, before the baby is born that is a life and there is a death penalty statute in place in ohio. they are looking at a very serious crime, and they have three eyewitnesses that he captured in their teens who are now, thank god, free who can testify against him. so any defense attorney in this case is begging the prosecution for life in priso imprisonment because there really isn't that much left here. i mean we know what happened. >> does he have some kind of twisted leverage here? the three women through their spokes people released a statement today, in part it says the longer this process lastings the more painful it is for them. so, does he have some weird kind of leverage by saying, oh, you know, if you want to give me the death penalty i'm going to make you go to court, i'm going to make them testify, i'm going to make them recount all of these
9:50 am
horrors? >> that is a very interesting point. the prosecution in my opinion really has the leverage here, they have the upl ultimate trump card of not only charging him with homicide boo seek being the death penalty. that bargain chip of taking away the death penalty if he media guilty, avoids the trial and putting the victims through the horrific situation of having to come into court, face him and testify, that really is a trump card held by the prosecution. i don't think the defendant wants to be placing himself in a position of having to spend the rest of his life on death row and then potentially face execution. so it's a serious problem for the defendant. jon: we will very to end it there. according to the jail logs a risker el castro has been refusing to shower or change his jail clothing. rebecca rose woodland, ken patowitz thank you both. jenna: paula deen sitting for
9:51 am
her first public interview since she was dropped from the food network. what she had to say. we are live with the 411 next. anyone have occasional constipation,
9:52 am
diarrhea, gas, bloating? yes! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues with three strains of good bacteria. live the regular life. phillips'.
9:53 am
9:54 am
jenna: today a very emotional paula deen. the southern tv chef breaking down in her first television inch interview since she was dropped from the food network. julie banderas is live. >> the jury is out, the celebrity chef star broke down in tears when admitting to using ration slurs in her past and then suggested people pick up a rock and throw it at her head. let's play the clip to explain. >> if there is anyone out there that has never said something
9:55 am
that they've wished they could take back, if you're out there, please pick up that stone and throw it so hard at my head that it kills me. >> okay no rocks were remember thrown on the show. thee said the people who love her are angry about the food net wobg dropping her as the people using lies against her. we are not sure what lies she's referring to. deen says she remembered using -lgt n-word when held at gunpoint by a robber when working as a bank teller in the 80s with the suspect was black. she may have used the word talking about her employees after one of them filed a lawsuit. she has been dropped by smith field foods. she says qvc is still standing by her side. the question is, could there be more fallout? will qvc pull? we don't know. she chaise she does not support
9:56 am
her fans boycotting the food network and apologized adding it was another world 30 years ago when she used ration slurs. back to you. jenna: thank you. jon: it is day three of testimony in the george zimmerman murder trial. how the judge ruled on admitting those 911 calls that sometime r-r made to policzimmerman made in the months before his fatal encounter with pharl trayvon martin. alex ferrer, no stranger to high profile trials on the impact.
9:57 am
9:58 am
9:59 am
10:00 am
well, the supreme court done issuing rulings for the term and no more thunder for them at least for a year or so. >> they are on vacation. >> america live starts right now. >> fox news alert. new details on the two new rulings from the u.s. supreme court on the issue of same- sex marriage. welcome to america live. i am megyn kelly. if decisions that went as expected after the oral arguments were occurring. the justice issued two different opinions. first striking down the key defense of merge act ruling that married, gay and les jardin couples in the 12 states that allow gay marriage have the right to federal benefits just like any other couple. and by deciding not to rule on the merits of california's propos


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on